In Brief
A three-judge bench was divided on whether matrimonial disputes in Family Courts can be heard through video conferencing instead of transfer. The majority (Dipak Misra CJI and Khanwilkar J) overruled the prior Krishna Veni decision partly, holding that video conferencing cannot be imposed in transfer petitions but may be permitted by the Family Court after settlement efforts fail, if both parties consent or if the court deems it appropriate for justice. Justice Chandrachud dissented, arguing that video conferencing should be available at any stage with proper safeguards, as the 1984 Act allows procedural flexibility and technology facilitates access to justice without compromising confidentiality or reconciliation efforts.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.